As the ARC plan was first proposed it appears that the stub end tunnel south of NYP with no direct connection to NYP was a bad idea. Amtrak could not use it for thru trains or trains going to Sunnyside yard. The Gateway tunnel as proposed appears to mitigate that oversight. However Christie should have placed full backing for the Gateway tunnel and have priority for its construction and funds transferred to Gateway.
For whatever reason whether it be to placate highway interests or tax hawks or other reasons that did not happen.
Many media reports of the Hudson ( north ) river tunnels and east river tunnels approaching failure. Some more alarmist than others here is one from Railway age. .
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/intercity/report-nec-new-york-tunnels-need-major-work.html?channel=41
2 of 4 East river tunnels approaching major shut down for Sandy repairs. The gifts keep coming ?
http://origin.ny1.com/content/news/216526/amtrak--new-tunnel-needed-before-sandy-repairs-can-begin/
Fox news
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2014/10/02/superstorm-sandy-caused-more-damage-than-thought-to-amtrak-tunnels-in-new-york/
Another
http://news.yahoo.com/superstorm-damaged-rail-tunnels-more-203631557.html
Here is the tunnel assestment report itself which WNYC apparently found. Draw your own conclusions ?
https://www.scribd.com/doc/241718975/NYC-Tunnels-Assessment-Report
This report also had an interesting aside. The duct work in the east river tunnel(s) in the walkways has both Amtrak equipment and "public telephone cable " . Did not find that in North river tunnels. However the failure of one or more of these tunnels might really severly restrict telephone and cell service as well ? Most copper cable did not have installed reduntant line but fiber usually does.
'
This report certainly is a shot across the bow to Congress, New Yor city and state, and NJ.
blue streak 1This report certainly is a shot across the bow to Congress, New Yor city and state, and NJ.
On the other hand, it does note that most of the 'damage' is in the bench wall structure, and chloride infiltration into the ballast, and notes "Apart from the deficiencies noted in this report, we did not observe any indications that the tunnel linings themselves were unsound."
Not to second-guess, but I'd think some sort of short-term encapsulation might keep deterioration of the bench wall structures minimized for a while -- leaving the major expense to be provision of the direct-fixation track. Interesting to see what systems would be involved, and whether effective 'throughput' in the North River tunnels might be increased if higher speed were allowed by the new structure...
Another opinion article
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2014/10/06/with-no-new-rail-tunnel-on-the-horizon-under-the-hudson-new-york-faces-a-looming-transport-crisis/
Just to muddle the water further an former LIRR executive is starting to push for just one tunnel. Claims two tunnels would require too much NYC realestate ? $400 M for real estate seems to be a very small fraction of the whole cost of the tunnels. Anyone wonder if this is just former LIRR person looking out only for his own RR ? Might be a way to allow more MNRR ( MTA ) trains in future ?
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2014/10/amtrak_has_404_million_hurdle.html
That former LIRR executive is now technical director of the Lackawanna Commuter Coalition. I think he is now involved on the NJ side. He seems worried that the real estate costs will delay the project. He wants more efficient use of existing NYP platform trackage. He shows that LIRR is twice as efficient as NJT
LIRR traffic to NYP may drop after the East Side Access (to GCT) opens. Maybe it will be replaced by MN traffic off the NH line.
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2014/11/new_hudson_river_rail_tunnels_could_be_built_in_7.html
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Lets see $ 100 M per day = $ 1 B in ten days = 10 B in 100 days = $ 36.5 B in one year. Although the $ 100 M per day seems off the wall still a good return of investment to build the tunnels ?
A concern is what if a tunnel collaspes ? Has Amtrak put flood gates on the ends of the present tunnels tunnels ? Especially the Penn station ends as it is below sea level ? Flooding could completely shut down NYP if no flood gates..
Did not factor in less loss on weekend days.
Now federal government has to worry about lost taxes. Haven't heard that argument before ?
New worries over Penn South station which will be an essential part of the new tunnels.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/hudson-river-train-tunnel-hinges-on-pricey-plan-1.1211136
I would think ATK could recoup much of the money they spend to acquire the NY real estate by selling the air rights.
I noticed in the comments following the article, some people not only wanted highway lanes added to the ATK tunnel project, but also pedestrian/bike lanes.
NY Times article on another reason that the new Gateway tunnels are needed. During the winter one tunnel has to be shut down several times a day to have ice removed from leaking tunnels. Now what happens when one tunnel is shut for long term maintenance and the other has to be shut down for ice removal ? Article will also stop some sceptics from believing the necessity to close a tunnel for ice removal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/26/nyregion/taking-aim-at-icicles-to-keep-trains-moving-into-and-out-of-new-york.html?_r=0
I have wondered why the newest penn station concept requires the expensive land buy of the former power plant site and church as the optimal solution to set up a new concentrated site.
Conceptually think about it since the expansion is for commuters it would make more sense to have several dispersed stations under the public street ROW along the existing alignment between river tunnels at the intersecting north south subway lines.
The demand in NYC is dispersed, so why not the commuter stations?
Essentially, the station would be a three track shallow tunnel with platforms along the entire length, with crossovers to the middle track for operational issues. Say 3 commuter trains would follow each other closely through the river tunnels, then they could all stop once at one of the platforms they line up with, or stop at each platform in a Congo line. The demand is so large, serve it with a dense arrangement of stops that minimize access costs.
BEcause of dispersal on the suburb end, NJC, NEC, RV, M&E, impractical and wasteful.
The track layout at Penn Station provides for platforms nearly as long as possible short of putting platforms in the tunnels on 2% grades at either end.
Amtrak is keeping up the awareness of the North River tunnels. Also on the link is ~ one hour video about London's Cross rail project and its cost. take your time on it..
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/05/inside_the_aging_cracking_hudson_river_train_tunnels_that_would_cost_billions_to_replace.html
blue streak 1 Amtrak is keeping up the awareness of the North River tunnels. Also on the link is ~ one hour video about London's Cross rail project and its cost. take your time on it..
Thanks for the heads up on the Cross Rail video. One of my flats in London was around there, briefly visible in the Video. Rode through the old tunnel when it was still part of the North London Line.
The pressure on the trans Hudson infrastructure continues with an all day web event tomorrow.
http://www.transhudsonsummit.com/
Interesting tid bit that Port authority may help fund Gateway tunnels. Guess that PANYNJ may be worried if North river tunnel(s) happened to close down ?
http://www.northjersey.com/news/port-authority-agrees-to-help-fund-amtrak-s-hudson-river-rail-tunnel-project-1.1328987
Another article on building Gateway.
http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/06/16/feds-call-nj-ny-gateway-tunnel-most-important-rail-project-in-u-s/
Another editorial about what will happen if one tunnel closes before a gateway tunnel is operational.
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/06/the_nightmare_that_awaits_nj_if_a_hudson_rail_tunnel_is_forced_to_close.html
Another article.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150629_N_J_-N_Y__gridlock_gets_worse.html
Amtrak talks about spending preliminary money for the new Gateway tunnels.
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150709/BLOGS04/150709912/will-the-gateway-tunnel-ever-happen-amtrak-has-bet-300-million-that
Another short article on preliminary work.
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150709/BLOGS04/150709912
wanswheelFederal project approvals and funding should come quickly enough for the project to break ground in 2009, he urged.
The ]Federal wheels move slower than a late Amtrak train. 2009 was six years ago.
Electroliner 1935 wanswheel Federal project approvals and funding should come quickly enough for the project to break ground in 2009, he urged. The ]Federal wheels move slower than a late Amtrak train. 2009 was six years ago.
wanswheel Federal project approvals and funding should come quickly enough for the project to break ground in 2009, he urged.
NY Post jumps in on need for new tunnels
http://nypost.com/2015/07/18/new-york-new-jersey-on-the-brink-of-tunnel-mageddon/
If ony one tunnel exists, how much capacity could be realilized by running multiple trains coupled together in one direction for say fifty minutes, then reversing the flow for fifty minutes with ten minutes to clear the tunnel. This would be like eight 60 car trains (made of five twelve car trains) running on four minute headways through the tunnel, then being separated and continuing to various destinations. Something like batch processing. How you load and build a sixty car train, I don't know but if S..T happens and one tube has to be closed, thinking outside the box will be needed. If they can run mile long freight trains, how about long passenger trains. Some way to maximize throughput. Your thoughts please.
It takes time to combine passenger cars. How much more time would it take to combine trains, if it could even be done?. How about mixes of loco hauled trains and EMUs ? Even if trains could be hooked together in 5 minutes, the first train in line would have waited a half hour until the sixth train is hooked up and ready to move again.
So come up with other ideas on how to increase throughput.
A similar idea is fleeting trains, but that doesn't work because Penn Station would fill up with NJT trains that don't use Sunnyside during rush hour that cannot escape back to MMC and other layover locations. The system is currently nearly at capacity, and operating under its most efficient operating plan. If one of the tunnels goes down, some trains simply will not fit.
Electroliner 1935 If ony one tunnel exists, how much capacity could be realilized by running multiple trains coupled together in one direction for say fifty minutes, then reversing the flow for fifty minutes with ten minutes to clear the tunnel. This would be like eight 60 car trains (made of five twelve car trains) running on four minute headways through the tunnel, then being separated and continuing to various destinations. Something like batch processing ... Your thoughts please.
If ony one tunnel exists, how much capacity could be realilized by running multiple trains coupled together in one direction for say fifty minutes, then reversing the flow for fifty minutes with ten minutes to clear the tunnel. This would be like eight 60 car trains (made of five twelve car trains) running on four minute headways through the tunnel, then being separated and continuing to various destinations. Something like batch processing ... Your thoughts please.
The critical problem as I see it is that many of these modern trains don't have full 'automatic' couplers like the transit stock in the '60s, with all the electrical and pneumatic connections integral in the connection. In particular, I think, modern HEP requires that the cabling be pulled out discretely and carefully by hand after having been 'blue-flag' locked/tagged out electrically -- and that alone shoots the idea dead before it gets too far.
The intermediate stage of fleeting proposed, though, is interesting. Theoretically a '60-car' train is short enough that you could have ready platforms for each 'chunk' of a train that length in parallel, arrange for crews for each segment to 'take over' promptly and direct it to its track (a bit like a glorified hump yard with people on each car) and then enough time between trains to allow the first platform to reasonably clear of arriving passengers before the next train comes in.
The 'catch' is that you really won't have 'four minute headway' in the tunnel very long, as it will take more than four minutes for the individual segments to be progressively separated, brake- and control-tested, the switches to be lined for the route, and the segments in the aggregate directed to their destination tracks.
I had thought of using a version of CBTC to run the 'fleeted' trains nose-to-tail under constant individual control through the tunnel, then just bang the coupler open at some point and accelerate the leading segment in positive separation just enough to get the switches to line and then return. I trust you see the problem inherent in this approach. Folks will get killed or hurt, and even one little 'problem' ties up the whole schmear for a protracted time, until the next time, and the next time, and the next time. If you thought 'flying switch' was a bad operational proposition, imagine institutionalizing it at high speed.
IIRC there was a provision in ARC for two trains to run nose-to-tail in the longer 'stub' platforms to increase effective throughput. By the time you have platforms effectively the width of Manhattan you're going to start having to define 'east side' vs. 'west side' trains, and then figuring out how to shuffle pax around when one segment gets out of place in the queue of arriving trains...
Electroliner 1935 So come up with other ideas on how to increase throughput.
Build the new tunnels.
Another editorial. Why hasn't some of the conservative paper and media not come out with counter editorials ?
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/07/christies_delusional_attack_on_amtrak_editorial.html
blue streak 1Another editorial. Why hasn't some of the conservative paper and media not come out with counter editorials ? http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/07/christies_delusional_attack_on_amtrak_editorial.html
Much more fun to read some of the 'comments below.' (Get past the first few that are the usual wiseguy stuff... )
I quote one in its entirety as both a start and an example, by a commenter with username "trainman":
"Many still feel that Governor Chris Christie sunk ARC, because of his announced fears that the state would have to bear the burden of cost overruns. That's true as far as it goes; however many writers, columnists and editorialists still harbor the misbegotten illusion that both ideology and political maneuvering were the principal basis of his dismissal of this undertaking. While an uninvolved individual could be expected arrive at that conclusion, there was far more to it. Here's the rest of the story:
"When Governor Christie sunk ARC in late October 2010, NJT's final New York City configuration was a "deep cavern," three track over three track stub end terminal below Manhattan's 34th Street solely for its own usage. Three key deficiencies argued for a revision in the project's conceptual goals: 1.) it prohibited Amtrak access to the tunnels and its own Penn Station platforms; 2.) it eliminated all redundancy between old and new tunnel bores for both Amtrak and NJT in the event (as now seems the case, thanks to Super Storm Sandy) one of the 1910 legacy tunnels had to removed from service for repair and rehabilitation and 3.) it blocked any track extension (originally a key element in ARC) from Penn Station to, or in the vicinity of, Grand Central Terminal. Major changes to ARC occurred in November 2000 when the MTA withdrew from participation, and then later when the Port Authority withdrew as the lead agency. That role was assumed by New Jersey Transit under the McGreevy administration which began to repurpose ARC to serve its sole needs to the detriment of Amtrak. The unfortunate, unnecessary and unwarranted changes to ARC instituted by NJT management in June 2007 lowered the tunnel tracks sufficiently such that redundancy between the old and new tunnels became impossible. The effect of this meant that Amtrak trains could not use the new tubes and still access its platforms at New York Penn Station, nor could NJT use the existing 1910 era bores and reach the proposed subterranean 34th Street "deep cavern" tracks. Exclusion of Amtrak led to an April 28, 2008 letter from then Amtrak President Alex Kummant to NJT's project manager Tom Schulze indicating that if this modification was made permanent, Amtrak would be forced to construct its own fifth and possibly sixth bores to serve its projected service expansion in the Northeast Corridor in the mid-twenty first century.
"In April 2010, unbeknowingst to transit advocates at the time, Governor Christie instituted an internal study group composed of key stakeholders to evaluate the ARC project and subsequently the decision to cancel was announced over the Labor Day weekend in September 2010. While media postmortems were focused almost exclusively on cost overruns suggesting that the impetus for cancellation was purely financial (which had they occurred would have had to have been absorbed in their entirety by New Jersey taxpayers), there was another side to it: the engineering mismanangement by NJT which was best epitomized by Christie's wife, Mary Pat, who was widely quoted as saying that the trans-Hudson ARC tunnel terminated in a deep cavern in "Macy's basement." Despite (or because of?) Transportation Ray LaHood's forceful efforts to change Christie's mind, the final nail in the coffin was driven in late October 2010 when ARC was permanently deep sixed for good. (Subsequently, then NJDOT Commissioner Simpson, in a meeting with transportation advocates and professionals a year later, commented that personally he wanted the tunnels to be extended from New York Penn Station to Grand Central Terminal, the keystone of ARC at its inception in the mid-1990s, all along. Of course, he was mum publicly during ARC's pendency.)
"After the Governor's termination, Amtrak announced in February 2011 its own version of ARC called the "Gateway Project" which is designed to address and remedy upon completion the three ARC shortcomings and will also provide a new Portal Bridge allowing for a full four tracks (only two currently) between Newark and New York Penn Station. Sadly, since this anouncement, not much progress (read available funding) has occurred with the "Gateway Project," except for glossy press releases and web postings as has been pointed out by Transportation Secretary Foxx's recent public comments."
Wizlish: Thanks for the in depth review. Unable to follow ARC during the first part of the proposal. The no reduntdancy and ability for only NJT to use the tunnels and stub end is revealing.
As I posted it now seems even more likely for whatever reason Christie only used the cost over runs as the reason. IMHO maybe he was not ready to take on the establishment that had put so much political capital and time into building a very faulty design ? Could it have been that he foresaw that some of the problems you mentioned would cause attempts to fix the problems ? As well an only NJT project would drop all over runs onto NJ.
It may have been LaHood's insistence to build ARC as designed prevented Christie from just saying " lets go back to the drawing board." IMO he should have bitten the bullet and probably would have if he had known "Sandy" was coming. It is interesting that even after Sandy that he did not cashier any one at NJT until the Super Bowl fiasco.
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/07/8572527/transportation-secretary-calls-hudson-tunnel-inaction-almost-criminal
Another NY times today
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/nyregion/transportation-secretary-seeks-meeting-with-cuomo-and-christie-on-hudson-river-rail-tunnels.html?_r=0
Yet another article.
http://secondavenuesagas.com/2015/07/27/the-ghost-of-the-arc-tunnel-haunts-christie-as-candidate/
Foxx gets into the act!
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Foxx-seeks-meeting-with-Cuomo-Christie-to-discuss-Hudson-River-rail-tunnels--45234?email=drtrack@comcast.net&utm_medium=email&utm_source=prdailynews&utm_campaign=prdailynews07/29/2015
Anotheer article
http://www.northjersey.com/opinion/chris-christie-has-a-case-of-tunnel-vision-1.1381412?page=all
^all those articles are so much political posturing and hot air. If the hot air could be converted into electricity - the entire East Coast wouldn't need any power plants.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD ^all those articles are so much political posturing and hot air. If the hot air could be converted into electricity - the entire East Coast wouldn't need any power plants.
Two Amtrak reports of progress of Gateway. 1st part of Hudson yard box 96% complete.
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/55196841e4b076742447c850/t/5553e513e4b00483b17a4493/1431561491984/AVitalLink_Amtrak.pdf
another
http://nec.amtrak.com/sites/default/files/Gateway_Amtrak%20Factsheet%20Spring%202015.pdf
NARP blog about the non building of Gateway tunnel.
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/william-vantuono/guest-blog-build-the-new-tunnels-already.html?channel=
The Port Authority has just announced a $4 billion plan to rebuild the terminals at LaGuardia Airport. One aviation expert guesses that over-runs will double that cost. I can see the RR tunnels being put off again.
http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/Analysts-skeptical-as-politicians-tout-LaGuardia-overhaul
Star Ledger new article and video about tunnel. Like the analogy about wasting down payment after not buying a house that is flawed.
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/08/the_source_of_your_commuter_hell_your_governors_cr.html
Moran comes across like a partisan hack. Aging of the infrastructure was very evident for years before the current Congress was elected.
Como says state can't pay for tunnels but he can build new auto bridge over Hudson and rebuild LGA terminal. Now nothing is going to prevent air passengers from flying from LGA terminal if it is not rebuilt but a north river tunnel failure ???
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/08/8573743/cuomo-outlook-new-rail-tunnel-not-especially-bright#
blue streak 1Como says state can't pay for tunnels but he can build new auto bridge over Hudson and rebuild LGA terminal. Now nothing is going to prevent air passengers from flying from LGA terminal if it is not rebuilt but a north river tunnel failure ??? http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/08/8573743/cuomo-outlook-new-rail-tunnel-not-especially-bright#
Read the actual letter, and the 'power plant heat' article earlier. Then look at the funding sources for the ARC tunnel (which actually was a NY-NJ project with little more than peripheral significance to Amtrak, perhaps by intent). I suspect part of the current 'impasse' -- perhaps a larger part than has been admitted -- involves the non-return of 'Federal' funds allocated for the NJ part of the ARC tunnel before Christie killed it.
A major part of the Gateway design is that it supports high-speed rail through the New York/New Jersey region, and a great part of New York State itself does not benefit from the project - less than from the Tappan Zee giving access to upstate, for example. That makes it harder for Cuomo to support the several billion dollars' worth of design and construction that suit the project for the purpose of high speed without subsidy from the Federal government. Christie has already mentioned including the Port Authority (with its toll revenues) as one of the financing bases to reduce the nominal state involvements.
In my opinion, ARC in its final form as the 'tunnel to Macy's basement' was a wrong answer to a question nobody really asked, even if it was by final intent directed at being a New York-New Jersey local project. My understanding is that Gateway will continue with through platforms from its tracks, albeit perhaps with some on a lower level, allowing more flexible service if needed and much better 'throughput' through the expensive new structure.
I suspect one method of 'apportioning' the cost might involve a percentage of NJT and, to a lesser extent, MN traffic using the capacity of the new tunnel and route instead of the old (probably higher-speed services) - this perhaps being in line with Weinman's recent blog point about AIRNet-21 paying for infrastructure cost and development independent of above-the-rail costing and resource allocations for actual train service.
Another part involves the probably-desirable taking of first one bore of the old North River Tunnels out of service to fully reline and rebuild it, followed by an equivalent time for the other, when Gateway is in full service. This, I understand, will involve no more than about a year per tunnel ... but the states attribute it either to Amtrak maintenance negligence or to the act-of-God Sandy inundation (which would involve insurance money for remediation and 'business interruption', not state subsidy or other tax money). On the other hand, expect most of the traffic through the remediated North River tunnels to be state transit agency trains.
erikem Moran comes across like a partisan hack. Aging of the infrastructure was very evident for years before the current Congress was elected.
Of course we can go back and lay blame on every Congress since, I don't know, the creation of Penn Central. But do yesterday's failures exempt today's "leaders" from stepping up and being responsible? Shouldn't. So the fact is still that the current Congress isn't doing much of anything about this situation.
But much of Moran's point was that Gov. Christie just cancelled ARC (whatever its merits or lack thereof) and did nothing to help the situation. That was grandstanding. Leadership would have been to say, ARC is not the right solution, we need to renegotiate, we need a real solution, not just going into Macy's basement.
I don't care about party affiliation, I don't even live anywhere near NY-NJ, but we need new tunnels NOW. Tunnels that connect to the network and will still be an asset 100 years from now.
Agree that we need to forget about the past for the most part. It is now and the future that planners need to plan for design of new tunnels tunnels.
There is a misconception that has crept in to these discussions. The present North River tunnels were jacked through the bottom sediment but as far as know not thru any of bedrock in the North river. Did go thru bedrock both under Palasaids and Manhatten The tunnels which are of iron construction actually move with the tides. That means constant bending of joints. How much will leave to others to inform us.
The new tunnels will be bored below the river bed thru bedrock. This will make them much more robust and not subject to the tides. However that may make the approachs to NYP steeper. That explains why the box tunnel is so deep we have seen in construction pictures. A concern is if the repairs are not started soon sections of the present tunnels might have to be replaced with new steel sections ?
EDIT; Here is a profile of the north river tunnels but note no indication that hudson is in silt.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/PCPOST_HudsonRiverTubes_Diagram.png
dn
Streak,
The North (Hudson) River tunnels were not laid in an excavated trench. They were excavated through shields jacked through the sedement. The tunnel's outer structural members are iron or steel rings about 18" long bolted together around the circumfrence of the tube. See Conquering Gotham by Jill Jones
Without skimming the whole book I can not find how deep bedrock is but it is MUCH deeper than the current tunnels which feature grades of about 2% in each direction. Elevation of Penn Station is fixed, so deeper tunnels all in rock will require much steeper grades, particularly on east end than is currently the case. West portal could be moved to the west, but again Penn Station is not going anywhere.
Mac
blue streak 1There is a misconception that has crept in to these discussions. The present North River tunnels are laid in a dredged trench in the North river. The tunnels which are of iron construction actually move with the tides. That means constant bending of joints. How much will leave to others to inform us. The new tunnels will be bored below the river bed. This will make them much more robust and not subject to the tides. A concern is if the repairs are not started soon sections of the present tunnels might have to be replaced with new steel sections ?
I think before this goes on much more, everyone should read this:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/42149/42149-h/42149-h.htm
and take careful notes of the detail. It solves your questions.
One point about the iron lining is that it is relatively immune to chloride corrosion compared to any of the usual structural steels. If there were a problem with tunnel sections 'working' with the tide, it could logically be solved with relatively simple ballasting over the top of the tube, constructing cofferdams with 'cells' to hold the heavy aggregate or other material in place laterally, or anchoring the tubes with stressed 'tendons' to underlying bedrock.
The major 'rock' portion of Gateway will involve traversing the Palisades, a volcanic dike for those who don't know the area, with the appropriate lateral and vertical curves for whatever level of high speed is expected. I personally expect a fairly sharp grade on the Manhattan side (to assist braking coming eastbound and acceleration going westbound) but full high-speed vertical curve magnitude and transition perhaps as early as departure from the riverbed area on the New Jersey side.
Apology to form. Correct about jacking thru sediment. If you were a construction worker in that type of construction doesn't it give the willies ? Am correcting my post.
blue streak 1 The tunnels which are of iron construction actually move with the tides. That means constant bending of joints. How much will leave to others to inform us.
The tunnels which are of iron construction actually move with the tides. That means constant bending of joints. How much will leave to others to inform us.
I don't buy the "moves with tides" theory, and also implore others more expert to render their opinions. My understanding is that in a river, as opposed to an estuary, or the ocean, the tidal current lessens, and may even disappear, as one gets deeper. Remember that the Hudson River, although tidal, needs to drain a lot of fresh water from upstate New York. If all it ever did was let tide in and out and never let any of that fresh water out it would eventually become an estuary its entire length.
At some point of course it becomes more of an extension of the ocean, an estuary, not a river, but still the current on the surface could be much different, and probably with lower extremes, than the current on the bottom.
Wizlish I think before this goes on much more, everyone should read this: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/42149/42149-h/42149-h.htm and take careful notes of the detail. It solves your questions.
When I have time I'll try it. Do you think it solves the question of if there's a bottom tidal current?
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
gardendanceAt some point of course it becomes more of an extension of the ocean, an estuary, not a river, but still the current on the surface could be much different, and probably with lower extremes, than the current on the bottom.
You've been sailing the boat too long.
The problem isn't tidal CURRENT, it's the depth of water over the tubes at a particular time due to the tides.
The tubes are full of air, and consequently they have displacement and buoyancy just like a submarine and try to rise, with only their mass and the (silt) overburden holding them down.
The actual vertical motion is about 2' max, and is in part resisted by the longitudinal strength of the tube. The effect was recognized when the tunnels began to be waterproofed during construction (before that, there was concern that the tubes were sinking in the silt due to the greater density of the tube construction including the iron liners). The explanation took a surprisingly long time to 'suggest itself', but the situation was well-recognized early on (and has continued to be recognized by engineers ever since). Here is a good reference that gives the contemporary perspective and some of the actions that were taken at the time.
I'd always thought of the motion as something of a curiosity, like watching airplane wings rise and fall (sometimes more than substantially!)under changing load. Certain it is that the tubes have been safe for well over 100 years, and to my knowledge there has been no ominous recent increase in leakage between segments that would indicate cumulative failure of any part of the tube structure under the 'cycling'. Spalling of the concrete 'benches' adjacent to the track inside the bores, due to Sandy salt is a much more significant problem -- which puts the thing in perspective.
Admittedly, I haven't read each of these posts, but I have a question that I haven't seen addressed so far.
Is there any thought being given this time to drilling new twin (or triple?) bores through the schist? If not, why not? Expense? Or are any new tunnels going to be merely new tubes laid on the river bed, as the current ones are?
Amtrak executive talking to NJ Senate today.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/New-Jersey-Amtrak-Hudson-
River-Tunnel-Northeast-Corridor-Woes-321232081.html?partner=nbcnews
During Hurricane Sandy the tunnels were stretched even further by the weight of the water. And, on the East River, at least one of the tunnels bent in two places as the weight of the water pressed it down onto a rock shelf on one side and silt on the other.
Como " Its not my tunnel "
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/08/8573882/cuomo-paying-amtrak-tunnel-fix-no
NKP guyIs there any thought being given this time to drilling new twin (or triple?) bores through the schist? If not, why not?
In general you want to avoid 'rock operations' when you can use a TBM in softer materials. But that is peripheral to the question I think you're asking, which is why not put Gateway entirely through 'bedrock' to eliminate the problems with the existing North River tunnel structure. The short answer is vertical curvature (which has been touched upon in a couple of the TL:DR posts. There is no easy way to arrange a tunnel to be in rock under the river and not very far down in the rock on either 'side' -- particularly in Manhattan where there have to be multiple platforms and access at "achievable" track level in the Penn Station east-west 'footprint'. Likewise, the amount of approach tunnel under the Palisades increases as the "lowest" point in the river has to be depressed. (I provided a cross-section of the riverbed geology in a previous reference.)
Again, if I remember correctly, at least one of the proposed Gateway routes takes advantage of the capabilities of TBMs and actually swings south under the river to reduce the amount of grade (both in peak and average terms) in that portion of the tunnel. In my opinion this presupposes that some major use of the tunnel will be made by commuter trains, as the long-distance trains would benefit 'both ways' by having a relatively steep grade ascending into Manhattan right up to close to the west ends of the platforms.
... are any new tunnels going to be merely new tubes laid on the river bed, as the current ones are?
The existing North River tunnels are very far from being 'laid on the river bed' -- that method would apply to the BART construction, for which I believe the approach was fairly new at the time, but certainly not under the Hudson. Those tunnels involved a shield and compressed air, in the normal manner tunnels of that scale were driven at the time. The observed tendency of the funnels to sink when not fully sealed, and then to float with 'hydrostatic balance' when sealed, does not reflect the idea that they were built in sections and then sunk in a trench; it is a consequence of the type of river-bottom material (silt) that the relevant part of the construction happens to have been driven through.
The Detroit River tunnels were built around 1900 by laying the tubes in a pre-dug trench on the river bottom although this technique probably worked better in the blue clay which underlaid the region.
Great discussions about construcyion `techniques.
Now Amtrak tells us what we have all suspected that there may be future short time closures of an undetermined amount of time. The closures may occurr from time to time but not the 1+ year that will eventually happen.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/08/10/nj-amtrak-tunnel-hearing/
It appears that business through out the USA need educating on these future delays. Business can put the pressure on to get the construction started.. Then they can talk to their congress critters. Business persons will realize that for the next 15 years there will be more and more disruptions to their New York city and area operations for lack of employees.
As far a construction time. IMHO The constructions needs to start now as soon a preliminary engineering is complete. That is a design builld contract.; The EIS either be waived or run concurrently with preliminary engineering. Maybe can use the ARC EIS.
The articles keep coming. It is almost comical.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/1-2b-for-what-much-of-the-cash-spent-on-scrapped-plan-for-arc-tunnel-will-go-to-waste-1.1389339
Gateway progress report Spring 2015
http://nec.amtrak.com/content/gateway-program
I read this morning about the testimony in Congress and the even-less-time-than-we-thought problem for the new tunnels.
So it seems reasonable to me to imagine a scenario where one or both tunnels fails or needs to be repaired. Is anyone thinking of a ferry service, a la the PRR, to keep passengers moving across the river? Imagine hearing once again, "Jersey City, end of the line. Transfer to the ferries this way."
Someone had better think quick about alternatives.
Random thoughts: 1. Wizlish, that was a complete & fine answer to my earlier "boring" question. Thank you. 2. I'm gladder than ever that my Lake Shore Limited exits Penn Station and turns a sharp right on its way up the Hudson to the bridge at Albany.
Or, instead of ferries, perhaps commuter trains could travel up the West Shore RR to Albany, cross the river, then go down the HR RR to Penn Station or GCT. But that would probably take a few minutes extra. (just joking)
Better to think about ferries, perhaps.
Governors and US Senators meet with Fox Aug 18. There is another link in this link that has picture of bad cable.
Food for research.
There are now much better submarine cables that are used for power transmission. Believe the there is a very high voltage set of 3 phase cable(s) at bottom of Long Island sound from Ct to long island.
A question for Amtrak is how many feeder cables are there in each tunnel ? Are any considered a backup ? Will present day salt water submarine cables with same or greater current capacity fit in the present tunnel conduit ?. Would going to 12.5 Kv 60 Hz from East portal or Gate to west portal of North river tunnels be a help or a problem ?
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/08/christie_booker_to_meet_with_feds_on_rail_tunnel_funding.html#incart_river
Schumer throws out a real high number but is he just guessing. What is needed is an estimate of how each part is going to cost. From Newark east bound.
1. Cost of 4 tracking to
2. Portal bridge north &
3. Portal0 bridge south then. It may be when Portal north is built Amtrak could use the Portal swing bridge for additional track space.
4. 4 tracking to Secaucus & new Gateway tunnels and present tunnels. Sub item Secaucus revisions.
5. Gateway tunnels and all auxiliary support items. Sub item real estate acquisition
6. Rest of 9th ave - 11th ave tunnel box
7. Connecting tracks from all 4 tunnels to present and Penn south station. May require some changes to Empire route access to NYP.
8. Penn south Real estate acquisition
9. Penn south station and connections to NYP / Farley
10. Tail tracks for future connections to east river tunnels 5 & 6
11. East river tunnels 5 & 6
12..Connections on, under, & around Harold interlocking.
Any bets his number was even a WAG much less a SWAG ?
http://nypost.com/2015/08/11/schumer-says-new-hudson-river-tunnels-could-cost-25-billion/
Another NYT article but look at the picture and see how convoluted the CAT looks like. Good example of NEC CAT Of course 30 MPH speeds do not need as pristine CAT as 160 MPH constant tension. But still wonder how often NJT or Amtrak snags it ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/11/nyregion/delays-for-nj-transit-train-riders-may-become-norm-amtrak-official-warns.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0
For a real emergency, the logical steps would be to increase the capacity of th existing ferry-boat service at the NJT-former-DL&W Hoboken Terminal (to three Manahattan points), add a second track to the "Reverse-Kearney-Connection" that handles about four or five trains each way each day that stop at Newark Penn Station with their terminal or origan at Hoboken. (2 or 3 each way, both Jersey Coast and Raritan Valley) For the East River, Amtrak New England trains would be rerouted again to GCT leaving available tunnel capacity for the LIRR. Reestablishing a ferry service from Jersey City would not be pracitcal. Track capacity at Hoboken Terminal and associated yards could be expanded.
What an error I made! No AC catenary into GCT, and there probably never will be, because of even more restrictive tunnel clearances than Penn. Probably,if two or three of the East River tunnels were closed. Acelas would continiue to use what capacity remained for Amtrak, and Regionals would operate only north and east of New Haven, with passengers using Metro North to New York City. Although, during off-peak, the dual-power Conn-Dot MN locomotives could be used New Haven-GCT. These usually pull the rush hour Danbury-GCT through trains.
Schumer proposes a solution (sort of).
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Schumer-proposes-plan-for-new-Hudson-River-rail-tunnels--45385?email=drtrack@ymail.com&utm_medium=email&utm_source=prdailynews&utm_campaign=prdailynews08/12/2015
How many hundreds of layers of bureaucracies does it take to screw in a light bulb? There are so many agencies, organizations, committees, authorities, governments, companies, etc. which already exist which could do this project, why create another monster? Two top contenders: Amtrak...they already own the railroad, the station, the structures...or The Port Authority of NY and NJ because it is an interstate agency in place and in charge of similar properties
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Coma " no need to meet with feds " translation " I want to keep my head in the sand and can have plausible deniability that I was not informed of the dier problems with present tunnels "
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/08/8573772/cuomo-no-reason-meet-feds-about-cross-hudson-tunnel
Maybe investors from China (or anywhere) could buy in.
Excerpt from Politico, Aug. 11
"It’s not my tunnel," said Cuomo yesterday, in arguing against the idea that the state should play a role in paying for infrastructure used by Amtrak and NJ Transit.
That’s where Schumer comes in.
On Tuesday, he outlined a proposal to plan, finance, and build the tunnel.
He called for the creation of a “new partnership” called “the Gateway Development Corporation.”
It would marshal resources and staff from Amtrak, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the states of New York and New Jersey, New York City, New Jersey Transit and the M.T.A.
The total project, which includes more than just a new rail tunnel, would cost between between $20 and $25 billion, according to Schumer.
Together, these various parties would be able to access a wide array of revenue sources, leverage private capital, and issue debt.
wanswheel Maybe investors from China (or anywhere) could buy in. Excerpt from Politico, Aug. 11 "It’s not my tunnel," said Cuomo yesterday, in arguing against the idea that the state should play a role in paying for infrastructure used by Amtrak and NJ Transit. That’s where Schumer comes in. On Tuesday, he outlined a proposal to plan, finance, and build the tunnel. He called for the creation of a “new partnership” called “the Gateway Development Corporation.” It would marshal resources and staff from Amtrak, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the states of New York and New Jersey, New York City, New Jersey Transit and the M.T.A. The total project, which includes more than just a new rail tunnel, would cost between between $20 and $25 billion, according to Schumer. Together, these various parties would be able to access a wide array of revenue sources, leverage private capital, and issue debt.
Schumer is not among my favorites, but he is making a realistic proposal to get needed work done. We should give him some well-deserved credit, but some posters on here........
Now appears pthat everyone wants new tunnels but no one wants to pony up even a part of the cost.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/analysis-hudson-rail-tunnel-plan-is-popular-but-no-one-wants-the-bill-1.1391222
I note that the cost to drive a car into Manhatten from New Jesey is $15.00 and $0.00 to return. Of course a car could be carrying up to eight passengers. If one takes the train from Newark (Penn) to NYC (Penn) the fare is $5.00. This is the same fare as Newark (Penn) to Hoboken. A ferry with a $9.00 charge is required to get to Manhatten from Hoboken. But the thought was what does NJT pay Amtrak for using the NYC (Penn) facilities that need improvement. If Amtrak was to add a surcharge of $9.00 or higher to pay for the construction, How much could be raised?
I also note that a PATH fare from Newark (Penn) to any other station is $2.75 so that raising the NJT fare could result in a sizable shift in ridership toward PATH.
One thought is since the Port Authority (P.A.) owns the bridges, tunnels, and PATH, they control the access to Manhatten, and may be a player in the Gateway Project. I suspect that the (P.A.) has its patronage areas just as Chicago has but perhaps they can get things going for Amtrak.
Electroliner 1935 ... A ferry with a $9.00 charge is required to get to Manhatten from Hoboken. ...
... A ferry with a $9.00 charge is required to get to Manhatten from Hoboken.
...
Would you prefer that the ferry not be required to get to Manhattan? It could go somewhere else?
Sorry, couldn't resist the grammatical comment. Your point about comparing fares, and its possible efects, is a very good one.
A friend reports that Cuomo is not transit-freindly. The new Tappan Zee Bridge will not have transit provisions, not even bus-only lanes.
The line from Connecticut to the former Shorham nuclear power plant switchyard is HVDC. It's pretty different from what Amtrak would require.
daveklepper A friend reports that Cuomo is not transit-freindly. The new Tappan Zee Bridge will not have transit provisions, not even bus-only lanes.
Fortunately, this is not true. The New Tappan Zee is being built with provisions for heavy rail to be built in the future.
"After more than a decade of delay, a New NY Bridge to replace the Tappan Zee is becoming a reality. The first span of the new twin-span bridge is scheduled to open in 2016, and the new bridge should be complete in 2018. The new bridge will be designed and constructed to last 100 years without major structural maintenance.
The New NY Bridge will mean less congestion for motorists, with eight traffic lanes, four breakdown/emergency lanes, and state-of-the-art traffic monitoring systems, as well as a dedicated commuter bus lane from the day it opens. Designed and constructed to be mass-transit-ready, the new crossing will be able to accommodate bus rapid transit, light rail or commuter rail. The bridge will also include a bike and pedestrian path."
http://www.newnybridge.com/about/index.html
Friends are not always reliable sources of factual information. If I read that correctly, the bridge will be able to accommodate bus rapid transit , light rail or commuter rail but they will not be there on opening day. Examination of the nex linked document (p 99->) shows rail will not be considered until 15 years minimum following bridge completion (2033or later?), i.e., the long term.
"Taking a longer-range view, the MTTF has recommended the following projects for implementation 15 years or more following completion of the NNYB:
* Passenger Service on the West Shore Line
* East-West Rail Options (Light Rail or Commuter Rail) These recommendations stem from the short- and mid-term recommendations and represent an evolution of the region’s transit system. This evolution could take the form of a more robust and sophisticated BRT system or a possible conversion to rail-based transit at some point in the future."
http://www.newnybridge.com/documents/2014-02-28-mttf-final-report.pdf
Reinstating the West Shore suburban service? Has anybody proposed how the commuters would get from Manhattan to Weehawken?
Perhaps by ferry boats? I think there's a precedent.
More problems this morning not completely tunnel fault. A vehicle fire in Lincoln tunnel caused a big back up and many buses destined to PA bus terminal took passengers to Secacus to transfer. Then a NJT train stalled in a tunnel causing a one tunnel operation. Even though Manhatten direct trains diverted to Hoboken overcrowding unbelievable.
Another op ed in NJ about Christie's meeting tomorrow with Foxx and another NY times editorial.
http://www.northjersey.com/columnists/turning-his-attention-to-the-tunnel-1.1393230
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/17/opinion/build-a-new-hudson-river-tunnel.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-right-region®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region&_r=1
Wonder if the stall was because of CAT power problems or a NJT trains having problems ?
CSSHEGEWISCH Reinstating the West Shore suburban service? Has anybody proposed how the commuters would get from Manhattan to Weehawken?
The Weehawken Tunnel has been taken over by the light rail. There is a light rail station and ferry servce at Port Imperial/Weehawken. Much of the WS yard area has been redeveloped. I presume commuter rail could continue on CASO to a new connection with the Hoboken line.
The proposal to revive West Shore service is Hoboken - Havestraw
This may have been poated before but gives a good overview of the Gateway project including Penn south ( note 2 levels of track and rail line to east river), New north river tunnels, Portal bridge, 4 tracks from Hudson river to Newark, Bridges in Md and some items NE if NYP.
http://nec.amtrak.com/sites/default/files/2015-08-10%20Gateway_NJSenate%20Final.pdf
Little more information about tour Amtrak gave to unknown officials Monday showing some tunnel problems & maybe other items. One nugget was that the cable that failed that Monday in July was not found for 5 days due to being located in a collasped terra cotta duct.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/dreadful-commute-sets-stage-for-tunnel-talks-1.1393927
Meeting::: Officials promise co-operation ???
http://www.northjersey.com/news/officials-promise-to-work-together-on-hudson-river-river-tunnel-1.1394072
EDIT: Something that needs pointing out to the media. The whole Gateway project is estimated to cost $20B. The new tunnels will cost somewhat less although after cost over runs ???. But the tunnels are undoubtley the most critical at this time..
Huffington post article on Christie's tunnel decisions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-christies-tunnel_55ccc675e4b0cacb8d333496?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592&kvcommref=mostpopular
Cuomo and Foxx go head to toe.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/08/19/cuomo-hudson-tunnel/
The bad news just keeps coming. Amtrak's VP for NEC infrastructure states that the 2 East river tunnels that flooded during "Sandy" are actually in worse condition than the North river tunnels. Article lists the many LIRR delays sice "Sandy"
http://www.amny.com/transit/payout-cap-on-sandy-damage-may-delay-rehab-of-tunnels-used-by-lirr-1.10756774
Bloomberg article on a press visit to one of the tunnels. Note: difficulties to replace 12 Kv cable. Also that reporters got drenched by falling water. Also tunnel twists trapping cable. So how much water is leaking into each tunnel ? Hope Amtrak has more than one high capacity pump available.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-21/inside-the-hudson-rail-tunnel-decay-water-and-a-power-puzzle
Time for all the Pols to take the tour?
This may sound dumb but why can't we make NY, NJ, and CT pay for the tunnels split the cost three ways. I add CT into the mix because they want to run Metro-North services into Penn Station at some point.
Sure, get Connecticut to help with the East River tunnels, and get Massachusetts and Rhode Island to help pay for the replacement Connecticut drawbridges, and get Maine and New Hampshire to help pay for the North Station - South Station tunnel. Go ahead and try! I will be rooting for you, for whatever it is worth.
New Hampshire doesn't help pay for Downeaster and Vermonter now.
zkr123 This may sound dumb but why can't we make NY, NJ, and CT pay for the tunnels split the cost three ways. I add CT into the mix because they want to run Metro-North services into Penn Station at some point.
Because all 3 states think that the feds should pay a major share.
zkr123This may sound dumb but why can't we make NY, NJ, and CT pay for the tunnels split the cost three ways.
In part because a substantial part of the traffic through those tunnels benefits states other than the three you mention.
It would certainly be possible to design a trans-Hudson tunnel that would predominantly benefit New York and New Jersey; in my opinion the ARC tunnel that went to 'Macy's basement' was an example of this. To me, that design idea makes very little sense -- if you are going to spend billions of dollars on a tunnel crossing, make it something that Amtrak and other longer-distance services, in particular Philadelphia trains, can utilize. But then what is the Pennsylvania percentage of the tunnel's construction bill? Delaware's or Maryland's? Amtrak's, for that matter?
My own opinion is that there is some percentage of traffic through a 'Gateway' tunnel that would be attributable to strictly regional trains, and hence be NY/NJ and Port Authority responsibility. To a lesser extent, there is intercity traffic between Pennsylvania and New York ('Clockers' and Harrisburg service, predominantly) that could involve Pennsylvania state financing. Almost all the rest, including just about anything involving Connecticut, is appropriately the kind of "interstate" service best handled via Federal contributions.
Much of what is now happening is a kind of intricate political dance intended to minimize the actual amount states, particularly New York State, would actually pay to get the Amtrak-optimized Gateway project. (Remember this is more than just the tunnels; the Portal Bridge project in particular, the construction funding for which will benefit primarily New Jersey, is a big-ticket necessity.) It is not surprising to find that states with a large laundry list of their own largely unfunded infrastructure projects would look to a presumptively stimulus-minded Federal government to provide them substantial subsidies for this, and not just what amounts to short-term loans.
Cuomo finally responds. Guess he might be feeling a small amount of heat from NY voters ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/25/opinion/from-governor-cuomo-build-a-new-rail-tunnel.html?_r=0
He lost me when transit lanes were removed from the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement.
Schumer wants $550m unspent "Sandy " funds to go to Amtrak for East river tunnel repairs. At least with these funds Amtrak could lose one tunnel at a time and not cause too much problems for LIRR.
http://nypost.com/2015/08/24/schumer-wants-550m-sandy-funds-handed-over-to-amtrak/
A note about big infrastructure spending. Yesterday the Detroit Free Press had a story about a recent shutdown of one of the two locks still used at the Soo Canal. The smaller lock was out of service for 20 days. Luckily the larger lock (the only one that can handle the "thousand footers" which carry 70% of the tonage) stayed open, except for about one hour. Virtually all of the US mined iron ore goes thru this canal, plus much western coal and US and Canadian grain. Its so important that Congress authorized the construction of a second large lock 30 years ago, however, they have not authorized the funding. The Army Corps of Engineers spends less than $2 Billion a year on such navagaton projects, and has a project backlog of $60 billion. The article lists higher priority projects that will be advanced this year. It appears that Congress only spends money on infrastructure that has failed, or is in imminent danger. I would guess they will not spend money on any new Hudson rail tunnel until one of the present tunnels becomes unusable.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/08/29/soo-locks-shutdown-expansion/71392210/
Suprize Coumo and Christie issue a joint letter to Obama on funding the Gateway tunnels. Not clear if this include all the Newark - NYP improvements. Now if this can get congress moving which I highly doubt.
https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/Joint%20_Letter_To_President.pdf
While I can appreciate that it is time we got started on new tunnels and recognize that it is inevitable that the majority of the money will be fed bucks, I think it is important the level of federal participation be capped, and that any cost overruns be handled by New Jersey/New York. I'd even be willing for the feds to contribute the entire cost estimate of $20 billion, but not a cent more under any circumstances.
I am deeply concerned that without that provision this will become another Big Dig subject to endless delays and cost overruns.
Engineering report of North river tunnels and maybe some of East river.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/241718975/NYC-Tunnels-Assessment-Report
Another failure of CAT power which seems to have occurred in one of the tunnls.
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2015/09/amtrak_power_problem_causes_delays_before_pm_rush.html#incart_river
Star ledger cartoon and short editorial.
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/09/light_at_the_end_of_the_rail_tunnel_sheneman_carto.html#incart_river
ABC news report that Foxx is trying to get scope of Gateway project. Seems that there is some question which parts would be done first or all completed at same time. Many sources have indicated that the 2 new tunnel bores, 4 tracking to Newark Penn and north Portal bridge all need to be in operation to get full use.
If both present tunnel bores can remain in service until the 2 new bores are in service then there will be 3 bores providing service until the 2 old bores are refurbished one at a time. The only Gateway item not critical is the Secacus loop.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-official-hudson-tunnel-project-clarity-scope-34186247
The old Portal swing bridge is supposed to stay in service until the Portal south span is in operation ( not part of Gateway ). That will keep the 4 tracks active. If for some reason Portal swing fails then the route would be down to 2 tracks until fixed. If the Secaucus loop is in service then that will allow more trains into NYP if the swing bridge has temporary failures.
Quick view of the tunnel box.
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/10/15/tour_amtraks_future_tunnels_beneath_hudson_yards.php
Part of Gateway project Portal bridge
Someone clued this in. The Amtrak FY 2016 funds request called for a total of $275M for the North Portal bridge. This is just the request dated FEB 2015. Who knows what the final appropriation will be . There are many interesting items in the request.
http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/133/704/FY15-Budget-Business-Plan-FY16-Budget-Justification-FY-15-19-Five-Year-Financial-Plan.pdf
blue streak 1 Part of Gateway project Portal bridge Someone clued this in. The Amtrak FY 2016 funds request called for a total of $275M for the North Portal bridge. This is just the request dated FEB 2015. Who knows what the final appropriation will be . There are many interesting items in the request. http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/133/704/FY15-Budget-Business-Plan-FY16-Budget-Justification-FY-15-19-Five-Year-Financial-Plan.pdf
Tiger grant to NJ to begin preliminary construction items for the North Portal brige construction . An additional $16M.
Quote from article. note other tiger grants.
$16 million to New Jersey to replace the century-old Portal Bridge, a major chokepoint along the Northeast Corridor. The grant will be used to support early construction activities of the project including the realignment of a 138kV transmission monopole, constructing a temporary fiber optic cable pole line, building the northwest finger pier construction access structure, construction the a service access road and building a 560-foot retaining wall.
http://www.rtands.com/index.php/track-structure/ballast-ties-rail/rail-projects-to-receive-more-than-155-million-in-tiger-grants-so-far.html
What happens in the unlikely event 1 bore of the North river tunnel closes or the Portal bridge fails before the replacements are completed ? Depending how far along construction, engineering, and EIS are complete what will congress do ? Would congress have no choice but to immediately appropriate the money and void any normal permitting processes ?
The only reson this question is asked is because of congress' action to extend PTC. This poster has no idea. What pressure would come to Washington from both the common comuter and business who depend on those workers.
blue streak 1What happens in the unlikely event 1 bore of the North river tunnel closes or the Portal bridge fails before the replacements are completed ?
Then the finger pointing begins and the politicians look for cover. The commuters and other users suffer, the contractors get rich (because its full speed ahead, do whatever is necessary) and the costs escalate. It won't be fun but I hope it doesn't happen.
In the event of tunnel or bridge failure the solution will depend on the political make up of the House, Senate and Executive. The east coast commuters and passengers are largely from a blue state region. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that a party that seems continally willing to endanger if not sacrifice the country's full faith and credit in order to make a minority political point, a party that is largely drawn from red states not in the main region affected, would have no trouble not appropriating any money or enough money, etc. just because a bunch of Democrats can't get in or out of Penn Station.
Do you recall the front page headline when NYC faced bankruptcy? "Ford to City: Drop Dead". I fear that tunnel/bridge failure in the NYC area will bring out the worst in politicians of a certain type. To build new infrastucture, especially on this scale, will require compromise in Washington, and compromise is held in low esteem these days by the likes of the tea party and its fellow travelers.
I THINK EVEN MOST TEA-PARTY TYPES REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NEC TO THE NATION. MICA AND RUBIO APPEAR TO DO SO.
This poster just stumbled across a NJT board meeting minutes. It has been noted NJT will be the lead agency for the enviromental impact statement (EIS). One item that is distressing is that it is expected to take 36 months from time contractor is selected till EIS is complete. Wonder if NJT will have to put the EIS out for competetive bids ? Anyone know if that will be required and if so how much time that would take ? IMHO these may be a very bad unnecessary delays. Since NJT already did a EIS for ARC why can not that one be used with a few modifications ?
A lot will depend on how much engineering work can be done in parallel to the EIS. All in all these possible delays just means getting closer to a possible failure of one of the North river tunnel bores.
Hopefully the 1st Portal bridge work will be complete if it gets started next year ( if funds allocated )
http://www.njtransit.com/AdminTemp/board_agenda_10-14-2015_final.pdf
daveklepper I THINK EVEN MOST TEA-PARTY TYPES REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NEC TO THE NATION. MICA AND RUBIO APPEAR TO DO SO.
Tea Party types only realize their perception of their own importance. The country be damned.
BaltACD daveklepper I THINK EVEN MOST TEA-PARTY TYPES REALIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NEC TO THE NATION. MICA AND RUBIO APPEAR TO DO SO. Tea Party types only realize their perception of their own importance. The country be damned.
Certainly true. Tea Party types and their "dupes" and "fellow travelers" and other Koch Bros. subsidized pols (the Kochs are heirs to the John Birch Society message) in the GOP have taken Teflon Reagan's 1st inaugural sound byte from years ago* to an extreme and made it become reality.
* "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
Thank goodness this is a non-political forum. Otherwise, I would worry we have been taken over by Democrats.
Rave on, brothers. You had both houses of Congress AND the presidency and screwed it up, big-time. Who has been more "obstructionist," the Republicans or Harry Reid and Obama? Name the last president who vetoed a defense bill.
Obama has the economy and foreign affairs in the worst knot since Jimmy Carter. Carter at least had the decency to be abashed, but not Obama, who continues to preen and try to polish his "legacy" ... which he had better hope history forgets.
dakotafred Thank goodness this is a non-political forum. Otherwise, I would worry we have been taken over by Democrats.
There were several coments on the CA High Speed rail thread about politics being "verboten", but then that was in response to criticisms of EGB Jr.
Party affiliation is meaningless - What we have is a cast of 'professional' politicians whose only thought is getting re-elected so they can further pander on the public dole, the country be damned. This applies equally to Democrats, Republicans, Tea Party and anyone else.
How much money gets spent on the election campaigns vs. how much does the office being campaigned for pay. Campaigns are paying 100 times or more what the office pays.
Show me a politician that leaves office, poorer or equal, to the wealth he possessed when he entered office and you may find a honest politician. I haven't heard of anyone leaving office under those condiditions (except maybe those that have had to spend on legal defenses for the corruption they were being prosecuted for).
I very much believe in free speech, so I'm not asking for you to stop the political posts, but could you please include something that applies to New York railroad tunnels, which I think is what this topic should discuss?
erikem dakotafred Thank goodness this is a non-political forum. Otherwise, I would worry we have been taken over by Democrats. There were several coments on the CA High Speed rail thread about politics being "verboten", but then that was in response to criticisms of EGB Jr.
There was only one, rather lame attempt at humor on an almost totally political thread on CA HSR, mine: "Norm: Is it necessary to drag Gov. Brown into the discussion? Politics are AFAIK, strengst verboten!"
Politics were removed from the forbidden list some time ago, correct? Either way, moderators don't seem to care.
schlimmPolitics were removed from the forbidden list some time ago, correct? Either way, moderators don't seem to care.
Too bad. This is a railroad forum and while politics do have much to do with the rules, subsidies and many aspects of the railroads, Red and Blue yelling (yes, I'll call it yelling since too many want to say its my way or the highway and are not interested in compromise) gets terribly old and as many note, repetitious. I often have an urge to say "Give it a rest" but it would not do any good.
Hopefully, someday we will learn whether heavily loaded tank cars do or do not exert unique forces on the track and put this mater to rest. In the mean time, its been a while since our last oil train accident for which I am thankful. Lets hope it continues. Possibly, the Railroads have found and repaired most of the bad spots in their track (doubtful) and we will get into next year in a happier condition.
Folks, please show some moderation. Some Tea Party types may be interested only in getting elected, but there are others who have serious and well-thought-out objections to increasing portions of the economy being taken from the market place and placed in the hands of the Government. Just as there are liberals who may be interested only in getting reelectred and others who have serious and well-thought-out concerns for the crumbling infrastructure, and conditions of the poor ahd sick and refugees. Let us hope there are enough of good will to come up with solutions and not just kicking problems down the road or making them worse.
Maybe I should have not used the words Tea Party, but maintained there are enough Republicans who understand the importance of the NECto the nation as a whole
daveklepper Maybe I should have not used the words Tea Party, but maintained there are enough Republicans who understand the importance of the NECto the nation as a whole
Dave,
Keep in mind that "Tea Party" and Republicans are not synonymous, while there is a fair amount of overlap, there are a large number of "Tea Party" types who are not Republicans and a lot of Republicans who don't identify with the "Tea Party".
Support or opposition to funding for rail transit projects in my neck of the woods (San Diego County) is not a simple R vs D thing. Bob Filner (D) was strongly in favor of Bus Rapid Transit over rail, while Pete Wilson (R) was very suppotive of Jim Mills (D) original proposal for the San Diego Trolley (first segment was done without any Federal funding). Keep in mind that many counties in California have voter approved sales tax surcharges for transit funding - which started with the 0.5 cent tax in the BART counties back in the 1960's.
As for the NEC, and as a west coaster, I would like to see some serious skin in the game from the locals as a prerequisite for federal funding. If loss of one or both of the PRR's Manhattan tunnels will lead to massive traffic jams on the likes of the Holland Tunnel and/or George Washington Bridge, then part of the funding could come from bridge or tunnel tolls under the guise of helping to ensure that traffic on the bridge or tunnel will keep flowing (in the sense of not being 24hr gridlock). NYC should kick in some dough as well as the city collects income tax from people commuting on the PRR tunnels and it would behoove the city to look out afer its revenue sources. New York State doesn't seem to be too gung ho on the project, prefering to spend money on airport terminals and New Jersey is an open question.
The EIS for the project is another -um- interesting issue. My curmudgeonly take on the issue is that doing nothing is likely to have a larger environmental impact than properly fixing/replacing the tunnels and that the various agencies requiring the EIS really should be filing EIS's on why the project is being held up due to the EIS requirement.
erikem As for the NEC, and as a west coaster, I would like to see some serious skin in the game from the locals as a prerequisite for federal funding.
As for the NEC, and as a west coaster, I would like to see some serious skin in the game from the locals as a prerequisite for federal funding.
Exactly. Both New York and New Jersey need to make significant contributions. In addition, to attempt to avoid another Big Ditch fiasco, their proportionate contributions should increase should cost overruns be encountered.
I'd also favor the appointment of a special federal prosecutor from the beginning of the project to investigate and try instances of graft and corruption. If I could devise a bounty for each successful prosecution of politicans, contractors and union officials, I'd do that.
NY Times reports a breakdown of all the Gateway projects.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/nyregion/amtrak-says-regions-rail-projects-could-cost-up-to-dollar23-9-billion.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fnyregion&action=click&contentCollection=nyregion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=1
Total $23.9B
New tunnels and repair of present $ 7.7B
Expand NYP $5.9B
This poster is not famaliar if the Hunter flyover project is considered part of Gateway but IMHO it is important. Have ridden the Raritan valley inbound to Newark Penn station and often thought that the CP switches needed to get to the east bound to NYP platforms could possibly delay many trains. Anyone know where the project is now ?
Is there any design proposaal yet ?
http://www.nec-commission.com/cin_projects/hunter-flyover/
A breakdown of the Gateway projects is in this link. Projects is a plural term. Note costs of each part.
http://blog.tstc.org/2016/02/01/gateway-project-timeline-released-but-cross-hudson-capacity-relief-still-a-long-way-off/
Well another emergency shut down of a tube. We must just hope that these shut downs do not occurr too often until the new Gateway tunnels are in service.
http://www.fox5ny.com/news/89624009-story
Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee subcommittee hearing: “Passenger Rail: Opportunities and Challenges for the National Network,” Feb. 23.
Excerpt from Port Authority press release, Mar. 23
http://www.panynj.gov/press-room/press-item.cfm?headLine_id=2388
The Gateway Program’s Hudson Tunnel Project to construct a new rail tunnel under the Hudson River will receive $70 million in funding for critical preliminary engineering work, with $35 million in federal funding coming from Amtrak and $35 million from the Port Authority, subject to the consideration and approval of each party’s Boards, in order to expedite and accelerate environmental review and permitting for the Hudson Tunnel Project.
Federal fudnding for the tunnel bores but article a little confusing. Wonder how the Christie hold up of funds for the EIS will affect the start or will be affected.
http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/07/federal-funding-for-gateway-gains-steam-103701#ixzz4EDRcojh7
US has put Gateway on a fast track
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Gateway-program-poised-to-move-ahead-at-record-speed-Amtrak-says--49782
About dashboard expedited
https://www.permits.performance.gov/about
Excerpt from Amtrak press release, Oct. 14
http://media.amtrak.com/2016/10/secretary-foxx-sens-schumer-gillibrand-menendez-booker-chairman-coscia-announce-major-developments-for-urgently-needed-gateway-program/
The federal leaders also announced that on September 2nd the Gateway partners submitted a Portal North Bridge Core Capacity rating package to the FTA for evaluation. If the project scores well, it will be included in the Department of Transportation’s recommendation for the President’s FY18 Budget. Inclusion of Portal North Bridge in the Budget, expected to be released next Spring, would represent a huge step toward securing significant federal grant funding. Simultaneously, the Gateway partners are advancing engineering and environmental work on the Hudson Tunnel Project with the goal of having that project included in the President’s Budget in the near future.
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/intercity/gateway-paradise-by-the-permitting-dashboard-lights.html
Port authority has just announced $300M for the north Portal bridge. That should get construction started however still ~ $700M + needed for bridge. That at least starts one iem of the Gateway project. But the money for the Gateway tunnel bores still to be had.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-20/port-authority-approves-money-to-replace-notorious-portal-bridge
One concern with the Bloomberg article. It is generally accepted that the present Portal swing bridge will not be replaced until the Portal south bridge is built. Until Portal south is operational if there are 4 bores under the Hudson and only the 2 tracks over Portal north that causes new congestion.
By the time there are four tunnels permanently available for service, all bridge cnstruction will be complete. Remember that when the two new tunnels are in service, the existing ones will be out of service for major repair work.
Here is an article that makes a summary of plans. One important item is advocates for the tunnel are worried if New Jersey is the lead. Too much has happened after NJ cancelled the ARC bores that in hindsight was a badly conceived plan.
http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/16/11/08/explainer-why-hudson-river-tunnels-are-so-badly-needed-and-so-long-delayed/
Crain’s article ('far from done deal') says NJ and NYS probably can’t put money up soon.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22Gateway+tunnel+project+is+still+far+from+a+done+deal%22
Has anyone seen the documentary about the construction of the original tunnels plus Penn Station on public TV (The American Experience)? I just saw it about a week ago on our TV station. What a magnificent undertaking! And all designed and paid for by THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD, a private sector corporation.
http://wptschedule.org/episodes/44907416/The-Rise-and-Fall-of-Penn-Station-American-Experience/
I really wonder how many Americans today realize the extent that government has usurped the "free market" economy over the last 100 years.
The tunnels were paid by the corporation, but the electrification projects in the 1930s were financed with low-interest loans from the US government.
aegrotatio The tunnels were paid by the corporation, but the electrification projects in the 1930s were financed with low-interest loans from the US government.
Johnny
With interest. Great investment from the Gov. Served the country well during the war.
Yep, same with Conrail. Lots of people still say it was a government bailout, and it was, but the bankers who financed the bailout were private corporations (with the loans guaranteed by the government).
They were paid back many times over with interest. Sometimes government takeovers work.
But, then, we have the tragedy of abandoning many important Erie-Lackawanna, Reading, Centrail Railroad of New Jersey, and Lehigh Valley routes.
Can we believe it ? The PA may kick in $2B+ for the Gateway project. This article seems to not denote which of the Gateway projects will be the receipent ?
https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/freight-on-key-lines-to-stop-if-33c-reached?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=top-stories-this-week-on-railpage
The link you posted has to do with heat restrictions in Australia.
Schumer makes a statement if Gateway not constructed.
http://observer.com/2016/12/schumer-says-trump-will-cause-a-recession-if-he-doesnt-fund-the-gateway-project/
Article about present tunnels say it will take minimum of 18 months each to repair each old tunnel once the two new bores are in operation. A disappointment is statement that the EIS for new bores will not be finished until 2018. IMO -- time to speed up everything. This poster's title of this thread is misleading.
http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2016/12/commuter_rail_tunnels_will_take_longer_to_rehabili.html#incart_river_index
blue streak 1Article about present tunnels say it will take minimum of 18 months each to repair each old tunnel once the two new bores are in operation. A disappointment is statement that the EIS for new bores will not be finished until 2018. IMO -- time to speed up everything. This poster's title of this thread is misleading. http://www.nj.com/traffic/index.ssf/2016/12/commuter_rail_tunnels_will_take_longer_to_rehabili.html#incart_river_index
2018 is sooner than 2028. Permitting grinds slowly.
Is it possible that this executive order will speed up the Gateway tunnel and Portal bridge projects or is it just for future projects ?
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/Trump-signs-order-to-shorten-project-permitting-process--52452
blue streak 1 Is it possible that this executive order will speed up the Gateway tunnel and Portal bridge projects or is it just for future projects ? http://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/Trump-signs-order-to-shorten-project-permitting-process--52452
Funding! Funding! Funding!
Some push back is occurring over the PATH extension to EWR airport indicating that PATH may take away froom the Gateway tunnel bores.
http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/12/the_path_extension_is_not_a_priority_gateway_is_a.html
blue streak 1Some push back is occurring over the PATH extension to EWR airport indicating that PATH may take away froom the Gateway tunnel bores. http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/12/the_path_extension_is_not_a_priority_gateway_is_a.html
Priorities! Priorities! Priorities!
Which priority will squeak loudest and get funding?
Is this an indication that Gateway tunnel work can soon progress ?
NY state, NJ state, & Port Authoridy commit $5.5B for the construction of the new bores. Now it is up to congress ? These funds go to the Hudson yards casing, the 2 new bores, & rehabilitation of present tunnel bores. Not included is the new north Portal bridge which is finance separately.
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governors-cuomo-and-christie-announce-commitment-fund-100-percent-states-half-new-gateway
NY Post article. Sort of thin but NJT riders will start out by a $.90 charge to pay for it.
Trump trying to scuttle any federal participation by not allowing loans to count toward the tunnel costs.
http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/376550-trump-urged-ryan-not-to-fund-ny-nj-tunnel-project-report
Even if this man said he was for or against any project, who would believe him?
At 5.9 lies per day (Washington Post statistic) a person would have to be a fool to take the present occupant of the White House at his word, let alone put money and effort on it.
As was said about Tsar Nicholas II (and how did that end?), he believed the last person he talked to. Trust cannot be put in such a person.
If this tunnel is to be started in the next 3 years it's going to have to be done either by the 2 states or private money. Count the Feds out, at least until the November 2018 elections, and even then....
And our national economy is in such hands.
So the President of the United States is putting a petty personal political grudge ahead of a key infrastructure project (identified as such by his own people) that millions of his subjects citizens depend on daily.
Situation ... normal?
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70Dude So the President of the United States is putting a petty personal political grudge ahead of a key infrastructure project (identified as such by his own people) that millions of his subjects citizens depend on daily. Situation ... normal?
No I think he fully intends to fund it but Senator Schumer tipped his hat already and tried twice to sneak this in on other bills so now President Trump knows he can use it as a bargaining chip because he now knows how much Schumer wants it. Just my suspicion, time will tell. I would not say it is scuttled until the proposed Infrastructure bill and proposed Gas Tax increase pass or fail. If those two proposals pass with no Gateway funding then we will know for sure.
On the slash to Amtrak funding I do think that was his full intention and he is trying to get rid of Amtrak but nobody has briefed him on the labor costs of doing so yet........plus he probably has no clue what level states are involved in Amtrak funding........so he still might back away from that once he hears the pushback.
Some time ago when this subject was being discussed, I suggested pre-jailing some number of politicians, labor officials, contractors and bonding agents at the beginning of the project "pour encourager les autres". That may not be feasible, but the history of this kind of project in the northeast is replete with massive cost overruns due in part to the conduct of the project.
I continue to believe that fed participation in this needed infrastructure should be strictly capped, and the inevitable overuns be a local responsibility.
This thread is 3½ years old. The ARC Tunnel threads came and went in a blink.
Its imperative that the Feds only put up a flat amount of funds and the rest is the responsibility of NJ and NY. Otherwise it will turn out to be the same situation as with the Long Island tracks going into Grand Central or maybe as bad as Boston's Big Dig. Especially since there is a history of organized crime being heavily involved in these northeast big projects [both the unions and some of the companies themselves]. In addition, it will take forever to build and probably not be well built if the states get a free ride. Better to be patient now so it gets done right then hurry up and suffer major consequences in the future.
Just to repeat here is a thumb nail of the woes of the tunnel bores.
http://gothamist.com/2018/10/18/cuomo_strong_tunnel_weak.php#photo-8
alphasIts imperative that the Feds only put up a flat amount of funds and the rest is the responsibility of NJ and NY. Otherwise it will turn out to be the same situation as with the Long Island tracks going into Grand Central or maybe as bad as Boston's Big Dig. Especially since there is a history of organized crime being heavily involved in these northeast big projects [both the unions and some of the companies themselves]. In addition, it will take forever to build and probably not be well built if the states get a free ride. Better to be patient now so it gets done right then hurry up and suffer major consequences in the future.
Just let the existing tunnels fail - look at all the money the Feds and State will save. Who need infrastructure anyway, once you build it it only becomes a maintenance nightmare that suck down more and more money. Who needs New York in this country anyway - sell it back to the Indians!
[/sarcasm]
help -- web site ate my first post about this. ============= and part of the second try
NY group has filed a suit in federal court asking that FOI request for EIS reguarding the Gateway new tunnel bores be honored. Group maintains that EIS may be hidden under a false name. One possible name might be "Mushroom" If so isn't that ironic?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-29/code-name-mushroom-lawsuit-claims-u-s-hid-nyc-tunnel-documents
help web site ate my post
blue streak 1 help -- web site ate my first post about this. ============= and part of the second try NY group has filed a suit in federal court asking that FOI request for EIS reguarding the Gateway new tunnel bores be honored. Group maintains that EIS may be hidden under a false name. One possible name might be "Mushroom" If so isn't that ironic? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-29/code-name-mushroom-lawsuit-claims-u-s-hid-nyc-tunnel-documents
Not sure if the FOIA is for the EIS, unclear in the linked article. Could FOIA be for correspondance between agencies regarding administration's delay of funding. In another article Batory says EIA won't be done until this year.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/Batory-FRA-to-complete-Hudson-tunnel-projects-EIS-by-early-2019--55836
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.